Fact and Fiction . . .

Regency ball
Murder at Half Moon Gate-smallAndrea
here, musing today about the balance of reality and an author’s creative storytelling in historical fiction. I got to thinking about this (actually, I think about it a lot, but for different reasons) because I happened to be alerted to a reader comment on Goodreads about my new mystery, Murder at Half Moon Gate. Now, like most experienced authors, I’ve learned not to take negative comments too personally, but this one got my attention because it raised an interesting question in the broader context of writing fiction.

First the comment: it said the story was a brainless read because the book wasn’t properly researched and would never have happened in the Regency. I confess, I was more bemused than offended—there are many things I can do to improve my writing, but I’m fairly confidant that my research is pretty accurate and that I have a fairly good feel for the Regency world.

First quadrille at almacksThe sense I got was that the reader is a big fan of "drawing room” Regencies— that wonderfully glamorous world of ballrooms, frothy silks and satins, and young ladies loving in love with dukes (and jumping into bed with them!) I love those too! However, all of us who read a lot about the history of the era know those books have a strong element of fantasy to them. The point is, I think all of us who write fiction, no matter what era, are always balancing fact with having some fun with our own imagination.

TomboyFor me, the key is creating a plausible world, one based on basic parameters, but allowing characters to be offbeat or eccentric. My feeling is there is no single picture that defines any era—rules are always being broken, people are always going against the grain. For example, the 1950s in America is often presented as an idyllic time of the good life—happy families, affluent suburbia and great optimism. Dig beneath the surface and the layers become more complex. Not everyone in the country was prospering. There were financial crises, the young were getting restless and rebellious. Stories set within different segments of society would likely have very different vibes.

Poke-bonnet-satireIn analyzing why the reader reacted so negatively to my book, I decided one of the main reasons was probably the heroine, who has taken over her late husband’s profession and works under a pen name drawing satirical cartoons that serve as a social commentary on the foibles of society. A first reaction might be—“oh, women couldn’t do that! There were very strict rules restricting their behavior!” Hmm, yes there were. And as I said above, rules were made to be broken. It seems part of our human DNA that there are always individuals who dance to their own drummer.

Portrait-of-georgiana-duchess-of-devonshireAs offbeat characters really appeal to me, I’ve done a lot research on the subject, just to make sure I’m not straying too far from reality. (No, I have no intention of writing a female prime minister in the Regency . . . unless I decide to write in the alternative-history genre.) Allow me to present a few examples. There are plenty of documented accounts of cross-dressing women who joined the army or navy—for either the sheer adventure of it or to follow a husband or lover. Georgiana, the Duchess of Devonshire lived in a ménage a trois with her husband and Lady Diana Beauclerk, who divorced her first husband, was forced by circumstances as a “single mother” to make a living from her artistic talent. (these two are Georgian. I know, but we won’t quibble.)

StanhopeMargaret Bryan was a teacher and author, who established a number of schools for girls, and taught science at highly sophisticated level. Lady Hester Stanhope earned the moniker “Queen of the Desert” for her years of living as an expatriate explorer in the Middle East. She wore men’s clothing, smoked a hookah and stories of her adventures were hugely popular in Britain.

So, when I sit down to write my stories, I try to be true to the spirit of an era, but also use my imagination to create a story and characters. As I’m an avid reader as well as author, I think I’m guided by my own reactions to the books I read—if the story is compelling and the world is made believable, I’m willing to jump right in. It’s fiction, and at heart it’s meant to take us away on a journey into the realm of imagination.

So, how do you feel about the question of accuracy in your historical fiction? Do you have a set picture of a certain world and get upset when an author strays from that? How do you feel about characters that seem to go against the grain of the time? Please share your thoughts!

150 thoughts on “Fact and Fiction . . .”

  1. It can be annoying when established facts are overlooked, but eccentricity and rule breaking are built in to the human genome. Even technological issues cannot always be taken as given. There may be eccentric inventors living in out of the way places coming up with ideas which are ahead of their time. See for example William Armstrong at Cragside in Northumberland who took hydroelectric engineering to extraordinary levels in Victorian times.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cragside
    I think the trick is to subtly make it clear that norms for the period are being broken. Subtlety to pacify the experts who know already but also to make all readers aware that you know that your characters are breaking rules … LOL
    Though, to be honest, I will forgive almost anything for an exciting page turning romantic reading experience!😉

    Reply
  2. It can be annoying when established facts are overlooked, but eccentricity and rule breaking are built in to the human genome. Even technological issues cannot always be taken as given. There may be eccentric inventors living in out of the way places coming up with ideas which are ahead of their time. See for example William Armstrong at Cragside in Northumberland who took hydroelectric engineering to extraordinary levels in Victorian times.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cragside
    I think the trick is to subtly make it clear that norms for the period are being broken. Subtlety to pacify the experts who know already but also to make all readers aware that you know that your characters are breaking rules … LOL
    Though, to be honest, I will forgive almost anything for an exciting page turning romantic reading experience!😉

    Reply
  3. It can be annoying when established facts are overlooked, but eccentricity and rule breaking are built in to the human genome. Even technological issues cannot always be taken as given. There may be eccentric inventors living in out of the way places coming up with ideas which are ahead of their time. See for example William Armstrong at Cragside in Northumberland who took hydroelectric engineering to extraordinary levels in Victorian times.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cragside
    I think the trick is to subtly make it clear that norms for the period are being broken. Subtlety to pacify the experts who know already but also to make all readers aware that you know that your characters are breaking rules … LOL
    Though, to be honest, I will forgive almost anything for an exciting page turning romantic reading experience!😉

    Reply
  4. It can be annoying when established facts are overlooked, but eccentricity and rule breaking are built in to the human genome. Even technological issues cannot always be taken as given. There may be eccentric inventors living in out of the way places coming up with ideas which are ahead of their time. See for example William Armstrong at Cragside in Northumberland who took hydroelectric engineering to extraordinary levels in Victorian times.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cragside
    I think the trick is to subtly make it clear that norms for the period are being broken. Subtlety to pacify the experts who know already but also to make all readers aware that you know that your characters are breaking rules … LOL
    Though, to be honest, I will forgive almost anything for an exciting page turning romantic reading experience!😉

    Reply
  5. It can be annoying when established facts are overlooked, but eccentricity and rule breaking are built in to the human genome. Even technological issues cannot always be taken as given. There may be eccentric inventors living in out of the way places coming up with ideas which are ahead of their time. See for example William Armstrong at Cragside in Northumberland who took hydroelectric engineering to extraordinary levels in Victorian times.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cragside
    I think the trick is to subtly make it clear that norms for the period are being broken. Subtlety to pacify the experts who know already but also to make all readers aware that you know that your characters are breaking rules … LOL
    Though, to be honest, I will forgive almost anything for an exciting page turning romantic reading experience!😉

    Reply
  6. Like Quantum above, if you give me a good story, I’ll be pretty forgiving.
    I realize that with romance, you have to let your imagination stretch. That’s ok with me. I don’t read romance for reality. That being said, I do appreciate when an author that has fudged on facts sets the record strait with an author’s note. I’m more likely to notice a language error than an historical fact error.
    A few years ago I read a Regency romance where the author referred to the heroine as “maintaining her cool.” But I still enjoyed the story. When I wrote review, I mentioned the rather glaring flub, but noted that despite that, the author still managed to present a realistic atmosphere of the Regency period.
    Another glaring area where I think authors do not get it quite right is sex in those times. Sex has been around since the beginning of time of course. However, I’m old enough to remember what life was like for women before “the pill.” I’m not arguing with the fact the sex happened – just with the attitude that some of these gals (in the stories) have. Some are way to blase about it.

    Reply
  7. Like Quantum above, if you give me a good story, I’ll be pretty forgiving.
    I realize that with romance, you have to let your imagination stretch. That’s ok with me. I don’t read romance for reality. That being said, I do appreciate when an author that has fudged on facts sets the record strait with an author’s note. I’m more likely to notice a language error than an historical fact error.
    A few years ago I read a Regency romance where the author referred to the heroine as “maintaining her cool.” But I still enjoyed the story. When I wrote review, I mentioned the rather glaring flub, but noted that despite that, the author still managed to present a realistic atmosphere of the Regency period.
    Another glaring area where I think authors do not get it quite right is sex in those times. Sex has been around since the beginning of time of course. However, I’m old enough to remember what life was like for women before “the pill.” I’m not arguing with the fact the sex happened – just with the attitude that some of these gals (in the stories) have. Some are way to blase about it.

    Reply
  8. Like Quantum above, if you give me a good story, I’ll be pretty forgiving.
    I realize that with romance, you have to let your imagination stretch. That’s ok with me. I don’t read romance for reality. That being said, I do appreciate when an author that has fudged on facts sets the record strait with an author’s note. I’m more likely to notice a language error than an historical fact error.
    A few years ago I read a Regency romance where the author referred to the heroine as “maintaining her cool.” But I still enjoyed the story. When I wrote review, I mentioned the rather glaring flub, but noted that despite that, the author still managed to present a realistic atmosphere of the Regency period.
    Another glaring area where I think authors do not get it quite right is sex in those times. Sex has been around since the beginning of time of course. However, I’m old enough to remember what life was like for women before “the pill.” I’m not arguing with the fact the sex happened – just with the attitude that some of these gals (in the stories) have. Some are way to blase about it.

    Reply
  9. Like Quantum above, if you give me a good story, I’ll be pretty forgiving.
    I realize that with romance, you have to let your imagination stretch. That’s ok with me. I don’t read romance for reality. That being said, I do appreciate when an author that has fudged on facts sets the record strait with an author’s note. I’m more likely to notice a language error than an historical fact error.
    A few years ago I read a Regency romance where the author referred to the heroine as “maintaining her cool.” But I still enjoyed the story. When I wrote review, I mentioned the rather glaring flub, but noted that despite that, the author still managed to present a realistic atmosphere of the Regency period.
    Another glaring area where I think authors do not get it quite right is sex in those times. Sex has been around since the beginning of time of course. However, I’m old enough to remember what life was like for women before “the pill.” I’m not arguing with the fact the sex happened – just with the attitude that some of these gals (in the stories) have. Some are way to blase about it.

    Reply
  10. Like Quantum above, if you give me a good story, I’ll be pretty forgiving.
    I realize that with romance, you have to let your imagination stretch. That’s ok with me. I don’t read romance for reality. That being said, I do appreciate when an author that has fudged on facts sets the record strait with an author’s note. I’m more likely to notice a language error than an historical fact error.
    A few years ago I read a Regency romance where the author referred to the heroine as “maintaining her cool.” But I still enjoyed the story. When I wrote review, I mentioned the rather glaring flub, but noted that despite that, the author still managed to present a realistic atmosphere of the Regency period.
    Another glaring area where I think authors do not get it quite right is sex in those times. Sex has been around since the beginning of time of course. However, I’m old enough to remember what life was like for women before “the pill.” I’m not arguing with the fact the sex happened – just with the attitude that some of these gals (in the stories) have. Some are way to blase about it.

    Reply
  11. I am fairly picky about history. I am also very picky about language (it’s an ARSE!). HOWEVER, I have to admit I used to think I was a bit of an expert, but it turns out I’m not as smart as I think…
    With a couple of reviews I’ve gone back and made changes after learning a thing or two about historical fact. I usually don’t change reviews, because it’s how I felt about the book at that time, but sometimes what I’ve said is silly.
    I remember a few historical romance authors in the past few years have said: it’s impossible to recreate history, so you have to create your own version of the time. Sometimes I wonder if in the future people will be calling stories about us “historically inaccurate” because we didn’t behave according to the etiquette books!
    Jane Austen’s characters certainly do not act the way they’re “supposed to” all the time!

    Reply
  12. I am fairly picky about history. I am also very picky about language (it’s an ARSE!). HOWEVER, I have to admit I used to think I was a bit of an expert, but it turns out I’m not as smart as I think…
    With a couple of reviews I’ve gone back and made changes after learning a thing or two about historical fact. I usually don’t change reviews, because it’s how I felt about the book at that time, but sometimes what I’ve said is silly.
    I remember a few historical romance authors in the past few years have said: it’s impossible to recreate history, so you have to create your own version of the time. Sometimes I wonder if in the future people will be calling stories about us “historically inaccurate” because we didn’t behave according to the etiquette books!
    Jane Austen’s characters certainly do not act the way they’re “supposed to” all the time!

    Reply
  13. I am fairly picky about history. I am also very picky about language (it’s an ARSE!). HOWEVER, I have to admit I used to think I was a bit of an expert, but it turns out I’m not as smart as I think…
    With a couple of reviews I’ve gone back and made changes after learning a thing or two about historical fact. I usually don’t change reviews, because it’s how I felt about the book at that time, but sometimes what I’ve said is silly.
    I remember a few historical romance authors in the past few years have said: it’s impossible to recreate history, so you have to create your own version of the time. Sometimes I wonder if in the future people will be calling stories about us “historically inaccurate” because we didn’t behave according to the etiquette books!
    Jane Austen’s characters certainly do not act the way they’re “supposed to” all the time!

    Reply
  14. I am fairly picky about history. I am also very picky about language (it’s an ARSE!). HOWEVER, I have to admit I used to think I was a bit of an expert, but it turns out I’m not as smart as I think…
    With a couple of reviews I’ve gone back and made changes after learning a thing or two about historical fact. I usually don’t change reviews, because it’s how I felt about the book at that time, but sometimes what I’ve said is silly.
    I remember a few historical romance authors in the past few years have said: it’s impossible to recreate history, so you have to create your own version of the time. Sometimes I wonder if in the future people will be calling stories about us “historically inaccurate” because we didn’t behave according to the etiquette books!
    Jane Austen’s characters certainly do not act the way they’re “supposed to” all the time!

    Reply
  15. I am fairly picky about history. I am also very picky about language (it’s an ARSE!). HOWEVER, I have to admit I used to think I was a bit of an expert, but it turns out I’m not as smart as I think…
    With a couple of reviews I’ve gone back and made changes after learning a thing or two about historical fact. I usually don’t change reviews, because it’s how I felt about the book at that time, but sometimes what I’ve said is silly.
    I remember a few historical romance authors in the past few years have said: it’s impossible to recreate history, so you have to create your own version of the time. Sometimes I wonder if in the future people will be calling stories about us “historically inaccurate” because we didn’t behave according to the etiquette books!
    Jane Austen’s characters certainly do not act the way they’re “supposed to” all the time!

    Reply
  16. When I pick up a book that is not a non-fiction tome, I do so with the knowledge that someone, somewhere, made up the pile of words in my hand. There may be a lot or a little of actual events and factoids in the book, a whole lot of research and careful planning, but there may be a great quantity of things that cause me to suspend disbelief and reality for a minute. It’s escapism and that’s okay. With that said, I really enjoy when history and fiction are woven together into a kind of beautiful carpet. I can deeply appreciate when the author has put so much research and thought into it that you can see, almost feel at times, history happening. It is my very favorite genre. But I don’t really quibble much about things that might (or might not) have actually happened unless it’s a very large glaring one. I read part of a story several years ago that had me scratching my head.
    Well there were no pay phone booths in Regency England so having the hero duck into a phone box to get out of sight was a bit incongruous (no I don’t remember the book). The biggest thing for me is language. Sometimes it will jar me right out of a story but I can bump over it and go on. All that said, I think your reviewer needs to realize that not everyone went to balls and such. Some had to stretch the confines of their lives just to make it from day to day and not everyone in ANY era has followed the rules and strictures of society. What’s that saying? Well behaved women seldom make history?

    Reply
  17. When I pick up a book that is not a non-fiction tome, I do so with the knowledge that someone, somewhere, made up the pile of words in my hand. There may be a lot or a little of actual events and factoids in the book, a whole lot of research and careful planning, but there may be a great quantity of things that cause me to suspend disbelief and reality for a minute. It’s escapism and that’s okay. With that said, I really enjoy when history and fiction are woven together into a kind of beautiful carpet. I can deeply appreciate when the author has put so much research and thought into it that you can see, almost feel at times, history happening. It is my very favorite genre. But I don’t really quibble much about things that might (or might not) have actually happened unless it’s a very large glaring one. I read part of a story several years ago that had me scratching my head.
    Well there were no pay phone booths in Regency England so having the hero duck into a phone box to get out of sight was a bit incongruous (no I don’t remember the book). The biggest thing for me is language. Sometimes it will jar me right out of a story but I can bump over it and go on. All that said, I think your reviewer needs to realize that not everyone went to balls and such. Some had to stretch the confines of their lives just to make it from day to day and not everyone in ANY era has followed the rules and strictures of society. What’s that saying? Well behaved women seldom make history?

    Reply
  18. When I pick up a book that is not a non-fiction tome, I do so with the knowledge that someone, somewhere, made up the pile of words in my hand. There may be a lot or a little of actual events and factoids in the book, a whole lot of research and careful planning, but there may be a great quantity of things that cause me to suspend disbelief and reality for a minute. It’s escapism and that’s okay. With that said, I really enjoy when history and fiction are woven together into a kind of beautiful carpet. I can deeply appreciate when the author has put so much research and thought into it that you can see, almost feel at times, history happening. It is my very favorite genre. But I don’t really quibble much about things that might (or might not) have actually happened unless it’s a very large glaring one. I read part of a story several years ago that had me scratching my head.
    Well there were no pay phone booths in Regency England so having the hero duck into a phone box to get out of sight was a bit incongruous (no I don’t remember the book). The biggest thing for me is language. Sometimes it will jar me right out of a story but I can bump over it and go on. All that said, I think your reviewer needs to realize that not everyone went to balls and such. Some had to stretch the confines of their lives just to make it from day to day and not everyone in ANY era has followed the rules and strictures of society. What’s that saying? Well behaved women seldom make history?

    Reply
  19. When I pick up a book that is not a non-fiction tome, I do so with the knowledge that someone, somewhere, made up the pile of words in my hand. There may be a lot or a little of actual events and factoids in the book, a whole lot of research and careful planning, but there may be a great quantity of things that cause me to suspend disbelief and reality for a minute. It’s escapism and that’s okay. With that said, I really enjoy when history and fiction are woven together into a kind of beautiful carpet. I can deeply appreciate when the author has put so much research and thought into it that you can see, almost feel at times, history happening. It is my very favorite genre. But I don’t really quibble much about things that might (or might not) have actually happened unless it’s a very large glaring one. I read part of a story several years ago that had me scratching my head.
    Well there were no pay phone booths in Regency England so having the hero duck into a phone box to get out of sight was a bit incongruous (no I don’t remember the book). The biggest thing for me is language. Sometimes it will jar me right out of a story but I can bump over it and go on. All that said, I think your reviewer needs to realize that not everyone went to balls and such. Some had to stretch the confines of their lives just to make it from day to day and not everyone in ANY era has followed the rules and strictures of society. What’s that saying? Well behaved women seldom make history?

    Reply
  20. When I pick up a book that is not a non-fiction tome, I do so with the knowledge that someone, somewhere, made up the pile of words in my hand. There may be a lot or a little of actual events and factoids in the book, a whole lot of research and careful planning, but there may be a great quantity of things that cause me to suspend disbelief and reality for a minute. It’s escapism and that’s okay. With that said, I really enjoy when history and fiction are woven together into a kind of beautiful carpet. I can deeply appreciate when the author has put so much research and thought into it that you can see, almost feel at times, history happening. It is my very favorite genre. But I don’t really quibble much about things that might (or might not) have actually happened unless it’s a very large glaring one. I read part of a story several years ago that had me scratching my head.
    Well there were no pay phone booths in Regency England so having the hero duck into a phone box to get out of sight was a bit incongruous (no I don’t remember the book). The biggest thing for me is language. Sometimes it will jar me right out of a story but I can bump over it and go on. All that said, I think your reviewer needs to realize that not everyone went to balls and such. Some had to stretch the confines of their lives just to make it from day to day and not everyone in ANY era has followed the rules and strictures of society. What’s that saying? Well behaved women seldom make history?

    Reply
  21. Fascinating link, Quantum. Thanks for sharing. I totally agree that there are likely always individuals whose thinking is way ahead of the curve. And those who simplt dance to a different drummer. I’m willing to go along with an author, unless there’s an egregious altering of acts without the story making clear thatit’s deliberate.

    Reply
  22. Fascinating link, Quantum. Thanks for sharing. I totally agree that there are likely always individuals whose thinking is way ahead of the curve. And those who simplt dance to a different drummer. I’m willing to go along with an author, unless there’s an egregious altering of acts without the story making clear thatit’s deliberate.

    Reply
  23. Fascinating link, Quantum. Thanks for sharing. I totally agree that there are likely always individuals whose thinking is way ahead of the curve. And those who simplt dance to a different drummer. I’m willing to go along with an author, unless there’s an egregious altering of acts without the story making clear thatit’s deliberate.

    Reply
  24. Fascinating link, Quantum. Thanks for sharing. I totally agree that there are likely always individuals whose thinking is way ahead of the curve. And those who simplt dance to a different drummer. I’m willing to go along with an author, unless there’s an egregious altering of acts without the story making clear thatit’s deliberate.

    Reply
  25. Fascinating link, Quantum. Thanks for sharing. I totally agree that there are likely always individuals whose thinking is way ahead of the curve. And those who simplt dance to a different drummer. I’m willing to go along with an author, unless there’s an egregious altering of acts without the story making clear thatit’s deliberate.

    Reply
  26. I’m a bit puzzled that someone would think it unrealistic to have a woman author or political cartoonist in the Regency. Throughout history there were women who certainly were aware of the legal and social constraints of the time but found ways around them. Women may not have been able to have their work published as Jane Smith but may if she wrote/drew as John Smith, whether that was her husband, brother, or a name plucked from a hat. Think of all the female authors who used pseudonyms that hid their gender — it’s actually a very realistic response to the limits society would place on her efforts. Jane Austen’s books did not have her name and the Brontes picked gender neutral first names, so it could be done.

    Reply
  27. I’m a bit puzzled that someone would think it unrealistic to have a woman author or political cartoonist in the Regency. Throughout history there were women who certainly were aware of the legal and social constraints of the time but found ways around them. Women may not have been able to have their work published as Jane Smith but may if she wrote/drew as John Smith, whether that was her husband, brother, or a name plucked from a hat. Think of all the female authors who used pseudonyms that hid their gender — it’s actually a very realistic response to the limits society would place on her efforts. Jane Austen’s books did not have her name and the Brontes picked gender neutral first names, so it could be done.

    Reply
  28. I’m a bit puzzled that someone would think it unrealistic to have a woman author or political cartoonist in the Regency. Throughout history there were women who certainly were aware of the legal and social constraints of the time but found ways around them. Women may not have been able to have their work published as Jane Smith but may if she wrote/drew as John Smith, whether that was her husband, brother, or a name plucked from a hat. Think of all the female authors who used pseudonyms that hid their gender — it’s actually a very realistic response to the limits society would place on her efforts. Jane Austen’s books did not have her name and the Brontes picked gender neutral first names, so it could be done.

    Reply
  29. I’m a bit puzzled that someone would think it unrealistic to have a woman author or political cartoonist in the Regency. Throughout history there were women who certainly were aware of the legal and social constraints of the time but found ways around them. Women may not have been able to have their work published as Jane Smith but may if she wrote/drew as John Smith, whether that was her husband, brother, or a name plucked from a hat. Think of all the female authors who used pseudonyms that hid their gender — it’s actually a very realistic response to the limits society would place on her efforts. Jane Austen’s books did not have her name and the Brontes picked gender neutral first names, so it could be done.

    Reply
  30. I’m a bit puzzled that someone would think it unrealistic to have a woman author or political cartoonist in the Regency. Throughout history there were women who certainly were aware of the legal and social constraints of the time but found ways around them. Women may not have been able to have their work published as Jane Smith but may if she wrote/drew as John Smith, whether that was her husband, brother, or a name plucked from a hat. Think of all the female authors who used pseudonyms that hid their gender — it’s actually a very realistic response to the limits society would place on her efforts. Jane Austen’s books did not have her name and the Brontes picked gender neutral first names, so it could be done.

    Reply
  31. I can’t find anything new to be said/ I “second” all the above posts. They explain my attitudes as if they WERE me.
    If the story works I’m very forgiving. As a quiet rebel, I have been disagreeing with 20th and w1st century mores for my entire life. I may look and sound conventional (and I frequent AM conventional) but it isn’t those social rules that structure my life, so why would I expect them to structure the lives of fictional characters??

    Reply
  32. I can’t find anything new to be said/ I “second” all the above posts. They explain my attitudes as if they WERE me.
    If the story works I’m very forgiving. As a quiet rebel, I have been disagreeing with 20th and w1st century mores for my entire life. I may look and sound conventional (and I frequent AM conventional) but it isn’t those social rules that structure my life, so why would I expect them to structure the lives of fictional characters??

    Reply
  33. I can’t find anything new to be said/ I “second” all the above posts. They explain my attitudes as if they WERE me.
    If the story works I’m very forgiving. As a quiet rebel, I have been disagreeing with 20th and w1st century mores for my entire life. I may look and sound conventional (and I frequent AM conventional) but it isn’t those social rules that structure my life, so why would I expect them to structure the lives of fictional characters??

    Reply
  34. I can’t find anything new to be said/ I “second” all the above posts. They explain my attitudes as if they WERE me.
    If the story works I’m very forgiving. As a quiet rebel, I have been disagreeing with 20th and w1st century mores for my entire life. I may look and sound conventional (and I frequent AM conventional) but it isn’t those social rules that structure my life, so why would I expect them to structure the lives of fictional characters??

    Reply
  35. I can’t find anything new to be said/ I “second” all the above posts. They explain my attitudes as if they WERE me.
    If the story works I’m very forgiving. As a quiet rebel, I have been disagreeing with 20th and w1st century mores for my entire life. I may look and sound conventional (and I frequent AM conventional) but it isn’t those social rules that structure my life, so why would I expect them to structure the lives of fictional characters??

    Reply
  36. The person who posted that review had a very narrow idea of women during the Regency. I think that ignorance, more than anything to do with your book, caused her to react that way.
    I loved the first two books and saw on your website that you signed to do two more. Yay! I made sure I put my email there to know right away.
    Even within the strictures of society, there were women who were determined to express their intellect and other abilities as fully as possible.
    I think it would be easier in the merchant class to be an assistant to the husband in his work than the aristocratic husband who didn’t work.

    Reply
  37. The person who posted that review had a very narrow idea of women during the Regency. I think that ignorance, more than anything to do with your book, caused her to react that way.
    I loved the first two books and saw on your website that you signed to do two more. Yay! I made sure I put my email there to know right away.
    Even within the strictures of society, there were women who were determined to express their intellect and other abilities as fully as possible.
    I think it would be easier in the merchant class to be an assistant to the husband in his work than the aristocratic husband who didn’t work.

    Reply
  38. The person who posted that review had a very narrow idea of women during the Regency. I think that ignorance, more than anything to do with your book, caused her to react that way.
    I loved the first two books and saw on your website that you signed to do two more. Yay! I made sure I put my email there to know right away.
    Even within the strictures of society, there were women who were determined to express their intellect and other abilities as fully as possible.
    I think it would be easier in the merchant class to be an assistant to the husband in his work than the aristocratic husband who didn’t work.

    Reply
  39. The person who posted that review had a very narrow idea of women during the Regency. I think that ignorance, more than anything to do with your book, caused her to react that way.
    I loved the first two books and saw on your website that you signed to do two more. Yay! I made sure I put my email there to know right away.
    Even within the strictures of society, there were women who were determined to express their intellect and other abilities as fully as possible.
    I think it would be easier in the merchant class to be an assistant to the husband in his work than the aristocratic husband who didn’t work.

    Reply
  40. The person who posted that review had a very narrow idea of women during the Regency. I think that ignorance, more than anything to do with your book, caused her to react that way.
    I loved the first two books and saw on your website that you signed to do two more. Yay! I made sure I put my email there to know right away.
    Even within the strictures of society, there were women who were determined to express their intellect and other abilities as fully as possible.
    I think it would be easier in the merchant class to be an assistant to the husband in his work than the aristocratic husband who didn’t work.

    Reply
  41. I have really enjoyed your books and am looking forward to your new release. It is waiting in my TBR pile. I have found your books very believable and well researched. I have read books that have been somewhat implausible and seem poorly researched,but if it is a good read and enjoyable I take it for what it is.

    Reply
  42. I have really enjoyed your books and am looking forward to your new release. It is waiting in my TBR pile. I have found your books very believable and well researched. I have read books that have been somewhat implausible and seem poorly researched,but if it is a good read and enjoyable I take it for what it is.

    Reply
  43. I have really enjoyed your books and am looking forward to your new release. It is waiting in my TBR pile. I have found your books very believable and well researched. I have read books that have been somewhat implausible and seem poorly researched,but if it is a good read and enjoyable I take it for what it is.

    Reply
  44. I have really enjoyed your books and am looking forward to your new release. It is waiting in my TBR pile. I have found your books very believable and well researched. I have read books that have been somewhat implausible and seem poorly researched,but if it is a good read and enjoyable I take it for what it is.

    Reply
  45. I have really enjoyed your books and am looking forward to your new release. It is waiting in my TBR pile. I have found your books very believable and well researched. I have read books that have been somewhat implausible and seem poorly researched,but if it is a good read and enjoyable I take it for what it is.

    Reply
  46. I am not generally a stickler for perfect history…..that being said though..
    In do not want my Regency heroine to pick up her I-pad for entertainment. I would prefer a ride in the park is not done in a vehicle with 4 on the floor unless the 4 are the shoes on a horse.
    I am forgiving of behavior that is not what would have been considered the norm for the era. After all, human beings are noted for doing what they choose to do when they choose to do it.
    If the story is well plotted and the characters are people I would like to know, that is what is most important. Far more important to me, are characters who are people I would not invite for coffee. Why spend time with people I do not want to know?
    And yes, I hope the characters do not speak in terminology which is not possible for the time. That is grating for me. I have seen characters use phrases which would have been good in the sixties, the 1960’s not the 1860’s. That throws me off my reading rhythm.
    So, in fiction, I do not necessarily expect perfect, but please have it all possible.

    Reply
  47. I am not generally a stickler for perfect history…..that being said though..
    In do not want my Regency heroine to pick up her I-pad for entertainment. I would prefer a ride in the park is not done in a vehicle with 4 on the floor unless the 4 are the shoes on a horse.
    I am forgiving of behavior that is not what would have been considered the norm for the era. After all, human beings are noted for doing what they choose to do when they choose to do it.
    If the story is well plotted and the characters are people I would like to know, that is what is most important. Far more important to me, are characters who are people I would not invite for coffee. Why spend time with people I do not want to know?
    And yes, I hope the characters do not speak in terminology which is not possible for the time. That is grating for me. I have seen characters use phrases which would have been good in the sixties, the 1960’s not the 1860’s. That throws me off my reading rhythm.
    So, in fiction, I do not necessarily expect perfect, but please have it all possible.

    Reply
  48. I am not generally a stickler for perfect history…..that being said though..
    In do not want my Regency heroine to pick up her I-pad for entertainment. I would prefer a ride in the park is not done in a vehicle with 4 on the floor unless the 4 are the shoes on a horse.
    I am forgiving of behavior that is not what would have been considered the norm for the era. After all, human beings are noted for doing what they choose to do when they choose to do it.
    If the story is well plotted and the characters are people I would like to know, that is what is most important. Far more important to me, are characters who are people I would not invite for coffee. Why spend time with people I do not want to know?
    And yes, I hope the characters do not speak in terminology which is not possible for the time. That is grating for me. I have seen characters use phrases which would have been good in the sixties, the 1960’s not the 1860’s. That throws me off my reading rhythm.
    So, in fiction, I do not necessarily expect perfect, but please have it all possible.

    Reply
  49. I am not generally a stickler for perfect history…..that being said though..
    In do not want my Regency heroine to pick up her I-pad for entertainment. I would prefer a ride in the park is not done in a vehicle with 4 on the floor unless the 4 are the shoes on a horse.
    I am forgiving of behavior that is not what would have been considered the norm for the era. After all, human beings are noted for doing what they choose to do when they choose to do it.
    If the story is well plotted and the characters are people I would like to know, that is what is most important. Far more important to me, are characters who are people I would not invite for coffee. Why spend time with people I do not want to know?
    And yes, I hope the characters do not speak in terminology which is not possible for the time. That is grating for me. I have seen characters use phrases which would have been good in the sixties, the 1960’s not the 1860’s. That throws me off my reading rhythm.
    So, in fiction, I do not necessarily expect perfect, but please have it all possible.

    Reply
  50. I am not generally a stickler for perfect history…..that being said though..
    In do not want my Regency heroine to pick up her I-pad for entertainment. I would prefer a ride in the park is not done in a vehicle with 4 on the floor unless the 4 are the shoes on a horse.
    I am forgiving of behavior that is not what would have been considered the norm for the era. After all, human beings are noted for doing what they choose to do when they choose to do it.
    If the story is well plotted and the characters are people I would like to know, that is what is most important. Far more important to me, are characters who are people I would not invite for coffee. Why spend time with people I do not want to know?
    And yes, I hope the characters do not speak in terminology which is not possible for the time. That is grating for me. I have seen characters use phrases which would have been good in the sixties, the 1960’s not the 1860’s. That throws me off my reading rhythm.
    So, in fiction, I do not necessarily expect perfect, but please have it all possible.

    Reply
  51. The worst error of all is for any author to take a real person and try to create a fiction story around them. I’ve contacted an author about doing just that when she apparently didn’t really know anything about the woman at all and what she wrote not only would never have happened except in some alt reality and didn’t happen. I know it didn’t because I’ve researched the lady and letters she wrote in the 1400s still exist in archives (it’s a long story). I read the book but knowing what I know I just got angrier and angrier. So that’s a no in my bk. I constantly read and historical romance is my preferred genre (Regency/Georgian/Edwardian/Victorian, medieval). And I even read paranormal and fantasy (Robin D Owens creates my most loved world, Celta). I want historical accuracy–it’s very important to me, yet I’ve edited some books for an author friend who wrote some historical fiction and she writes very Chaucerian so–some words cross time and we know them and they can be used today, others may be new to us but we understand them as they fit into a sentence. All draw a picture in our mind, no matter the genre or the time period. All are also for most of us an escape–and must be an escape–from the pressures and stress today, however little or great those might be. We’re presented an alternate world to live in for a little while, where all the men are handsome and even a wallflower or widow or spinster will find a great love that’s perfect for her (whether the relatives approve or she runs off to Gretna Green). I do agree that women have always found a way to live, survive and flourish in a man’s world, one way or another and I want to read about those women and their men who are also probably reaching outside the norms or society. I want my historical accuracy- with a little delicious rebellion against the norm. And as has been said–there are always humans who reach beyond, rebel at times (even if they otherwise appear to fit right in),and would be just as interesting if you knew them today as they were in the time period they’re set in.

    Reply
  52. The worst error of all is for any author to take a real person and try to create a fiction story around them. I’ve contacted an author about doing just that when she apparently didn’t really know anything about the woman at all and what she wrote not only would never have happened except in some alt reality and didn’t happen. I know it didn’t because I’ve researched the lady and letters she wrote in the 1400s still exist in archives (it’s a long story). I read the book but knowing what I know I just got angrier and angrier. So that’s a no in my bk. I constantly read and historical romance is my preferred genre (Regency/Georgian/Edwardian/Victorian, medieval). And I even read paranormal and fantasy (Robin D Owens creates my most loved world, Celta). I want historical accuracy–it’s very important to me, yet I’ve edited some books for an author friend who wrote some historical fiction and she writes very Chaucerian so–some words cross time and we know them and they can be used today, others may be new to us but we understand them as they fit into a sentence. All draw a picture in our mind, no matter the genre or the time period. All are also for most of us an escape–and must be an escape–from the pressures and stress today, however little or great those might be. We’re presented an alternate world to live in for a little while, where all the men are handsome and even a wallflower or widow or spinster will find a great love that’s perfect for her (whether the relatives approve or she runs off to Gretna Green). I do agree that women have always found a way to live, survive and flourish in a man’s world, one way or another and I want to read about those women and their men who are also probably reaching outside the norms or society. I want my historical accuracy- with a little delicious rebellion against the norm. And as has been said–there are always humans who reach beyond, rebel at times (even if they otherwise appear to fit right in),and would be just as interesting if you knew them today as they were in the time period they’re set in.

    Reply
  53. The worst error of all is for any author to take a real person and try to create a fiction story around them. I’ve contacted an author about doing just that when she apparently didn’t really know anything about the woman at all and what she wrote not only would never have happened except in some alt reality and didn’t happen. I know it didn’t because I’ve researched the lady and letters she wrote in the 1400s still exist in archives (it’s a long story). I read the book but knowing what I know I just got angrier and angrier. So that’s a no in my bk. I constantly read and historical romance is my preferred genre (Regency/Georgian/Edwardian/Victorian, medieval). And I even read paranormal and fantasy (Robin D Owens creates my most loved world, Celta). I want historical accuracy–it’s very important to me, yet I’ve edited some books for an author friend who wrote some historical fiction and she writes very Chaucerian so–some words cross time and we know them and they can be used today, others may be new to us but we understand them as they fit into a sentence. All draw a picture in our mind, no matter the genre or the time period. All are also for most of us an escape–and must be an escape–from the pressures and stress today, however little or great those might be. We’re presented an alternate world to live in for a little while, where all the men are handsome and even a wallflower or widow or spinster will find a great love that’s perfect for her (whether the relatives approve or she runs off to Gretna Green). I do agree that women have always found a way to live, survive and flourish in a man’s world, one way or another and I want to read about those women and their men who are also probably reaching outside the norms or society. I want my historical accuracy- with a little delicious rebellion against the norm. And as has been said–there are always humans who reach beyond, rebel at times (even if they otherwise appear to fit right in),and would be just as interesting if you knew them today as they were in the time period they’re set in.

    Reply
  54. The worst error of all is for any author to take a real person and try to create a fiction story around them. I’ve contacted an author about doing just that when she apparently didn’t really know anything about the woman at all and what she wrote not only would never have happened except in some alt reality and didn’t happen. I know it didn’t because I’ve researched the lady and letters she wrote in the 1400s still exist in archives (it’s a long story). I read the book but knowing what I know I just got angrier and angrier. So that’s a no in my bk. I constantly read and historical romance is my preferred genre (Regency/Georgian/Edwardian/Victorian, medieval). And I even read paranormal and fantasy (Robin D Owens creates my most loved world, Celta). I want historical accuracy–it’s very important to me, yet I’ve edited some books for an author friend who wrote some historical fiction and she writes very Chaucerian so–some words cross time and we know them and they can be used today, others may be new to us but we understand them as they fit into a sentence. All draw a picture in our mind, no matter the genre or the time period. All are also for most of us an escape–and must be an escape–from the pressures and stress today, however little or great those might be. We’re presented an alternate world to live in for a little while, where all the men are handsome and even a wallflower or widow or spinster will find a great love that’s perfect for her (whether the relatives approve or she runs off to Gretna Green). I do agree that women have always found a way to live, survive and flourish in a man’s world, one way or another and I want to read about those women and their men who are also probably reaching outside the norms or society. I want my historical accuracy- with a little delicious rebellion against the norm. And as has been said–there are always humans who reach beyond, rebel at times (even if they otherwise appear to fit right in),and would be just as interesting if you knew them today as they were in the time period they’re set in.

    Reply
  55. The worst error of all is for any author to take a real person and try to create a fiction story around them. I’ve contacted an author about doing just that when she apparently didn’t really know anything about the woman at all and what she wrote not only would never have happened except in some alt reality and didn’t happen. I know it didn’t because I’ve researched the lady and letters she wrote in the 1400s still exist in archives (it’s a long story). I read the book but knowing what I know I just got angrier and angrier. So that’s a no in my bk. I constantly read and historical romance is my preferred genre (Regency/Georgian/Edwardian/Victorian, medieval). And I even read paranormal and fantasy (Robin D Owens creates my most loved world, Celta). I want historical accuracy–it’s very important to me, yet I’ve edited some books for an author friend who wrote some historical fiction and she writes very Chaucerian so–some words cross time and we know them and they can be used today, others may be new to us but we understand them as they fit into a sentence. All draw a picture in our mind, no matter the genre or the time period. All are also for most of us an escape–and must be an escape–from the pressures and stress today, however little or great those might be. We’re presented an alternate world to live in for a little while, where all the men are handsome and even a wallflower or widow or spinster will find a great love that’s perfect for her (whether the relatives approve or she runs off to Gretna Green). I do agree that women have always found a way to live, survive and flourish in a man’s world, one way or another and I want to read about those women and their men who are also probably reaching outside the norms or society. I want my historical accuracy- with a little delicious rebellion against the norm. And as has been said–there are always humans who reach beyond, rebel at times (even if they otherwise appear to fit right in),and would be just as interesting if you knew them today as they were in the time period they’re set in.

    Reply
  56. As you say, there were always people who violated the social norms, and truth is stranger than fiction. I’m sure it was a lot easier for a woman to disguise herself as a man and join the military a couple of centuries ago, than it is now. So I’m willing to accept and believe all kinds of actions on the part of fictional characters. I do notice the language glitches though!

    Reply
  57. As you say, there were always people who violated the social norms, and truth is stranger than fiction. I’m sure it was a lot easier for a woman to disguise herself as a man and join the military a couple of centuries ago, than it is now. So I’m willing to accept and believe all kinds of actions on the part of fictional characters. I do notice the language glitches though!

    Reply
  58. As you say, there were always people who violated the social norms, and truth is stranger than fiction. I’m sure it was a lot easier for a woman to disguise herself as a man and join the military a couple of centuries ago, than it is now. So I’m willing to accept and believe all kinds of actions on the part of fictional characters. I do notice the language glitches though!

    Reply
  59. As you say, there were always people who violated the social norms, and truth is stranger than fiction. I’m sure it was a lot easier for a woman to disguise herself as a man and join the military a couple of centuries ago, than it is now. So I’m willing to accept and believe all kinds of actions on the part of fictional characters. I do notice the language glitches though!

    Reply
  60. As you say, there were always people who violated the social norms, and truth is stranger than fiction. I’m sure it was a lot easier for a woman to disguise herself as a man and join the military a couple of centuries ago, than it is now. So I’m willing to accept and believe all kinds of actions on the part of fictional characters. I do notice the language glitches though!

    Reply
  61. Thanks so much Patricia! So glad you enjoyed the first two books.
    That’s a really good point about the mechant class. I think you’re right—those women had an easier time finding a way to exercise their intellect and practical skills. Highborn ladies had a harder time, but they still found ways.

    Reply
  62. Thanks so much Patricia! So glad you enjoyed the first two books.
    That’s a really good point about the mechant class. I think you’re right—those women had an easier time finding a way to exercise their intellect and practical skills. Highborn ladies had a harder time, but they still found ways.

    Reply
  63. Thanks so much Patricia! So glad you enjoyed the first two books.
    That’s a really good point about the mechant class. I think you’re right—those women had an easier time finding a way to exercise their intellect and practical skills. Highborn ladies had a harder time, but they still found ways.

    Reply
  64. Thanks so much Patricia! So glad you enjoyed the first two books.
    That’s a really good point about the mechant class. I think you’re right—those women had an easier time finding a way to exercise their intellect and practical skills. Highborn ladies had a harder time, but they still found ways.

    Reply
  65. Thanks so much Patricia! So glad you enjoyed the first two books.
    That’s a really good point about the mechant class. I think you’re right—those women had an easier time finding a way to exercise their intellect and practical skills. Highborn ladies had a harder time, but they still found ways.

    Reply
  66. If the reader wanted a ‘proper regency romance’ then she should have read one. It was this type of book I read all the time until I read your first book, Murder on Black Swan Lane. I loved it and the second even more. People are people the world over and that goes for past worlds too. The seedy side of life is not always easy to read about but it happens. To some the Regency was a sparkling enjoyable time of ballrooms and routs and card tables etc. The real world was different and I thought you captured it brilliantly in your novels. There have always been pioneers (thank goodness) and why should and ordinary, everyday woman who needs an income not be one of them.
    Thank God you’re an intelligent woman and know your research is correct and will be writing two more (at least) for us to enjoy.
    Maybe you caught the reader on a bad day 😉

    Reply
  67. If the reader wanted a ‘proper regency romance’ then she should have read one. It was this type of book I read all the time until I read your first book, Murder on Black Swan Lane. I loved it and the second even more. People are people the world over and that goes for past worlds too. The seedy side of life is not always easy to read about but it happens. To some the Regency was a sparkling enjoyable time of ballrooms and routs and card tables etc. The real world was different and I thought you captured it brilliantly in your novels. There have always been pioneers (thank goodness) and why should and ordinary, everyday woman who needs an income not be one of them.
    Thank God you’re an intelligent woman and know your research is correct and will be writing two more (at least) for us to enjoy.
    Maybe you caught the reader on a bad day 😉

    Reply
  68. If the reader wanted a ‘proper regency romance’ then she should have read one. It was this type of book I read all the time until I read your first book, Murder on Black Swan Lane. I loved it and the second even more. People are people the world over and that goes for past worlds too. The seedy side of life is not always easy to read about but it happens. To some the Regency was a sparkling enjoyable time of ballrooms and routs and card tables etc. The real world was different and I thought you captured it brilliantly in your novels. There have always been pioneers (thank goodness) and why should and ordinary, everyday woman who needs an income not be one of them.
    Thank God you’re an intelligent woman and know your research is correct and will be writing two more (at least) for us to enjoy.
    Maybe you caught the reader on a bad day 😉

    Reply
  69. If the reader wanted a ‘proper regency romance’ then she should have read one. It was this type of book I read all the time until I read your first book, Murder on Black Swan Lane. I loved it and the second even more. People are people the world over and that goes for past worlds too. The seedy side of life is not always easy to read about but it happens. To some the Regency was a sparkling enjoyable time of ballrooms and routs and card tables etc. The real world was different and I thought you captured it brilliantly in your novels. There have always been pioneers (thank goodness) and why should and ordinary, everyday woman who needs an income not be one of them.
    Thank God you’re an intelligent woman and know your research is correct and will be writing two more (at least) for us to enjoy.
    Maybe you caught the reader on a bad day 😉

    Reply
  70. If the reader wanted a ‘proper regency romance’ then she should have read one. It was this type of book I read all the time until I read your first book, Murder on Black Swan Lane. I loved it and the second even more. People are people the world over and that goes for past worlds too. The seedy side of life is not always easy to read about but it happens. To some the Regency was a sparkling enjoyable time of ballrooms and routs and card tables etc. The real world was different and I thought you captured it brilliantly in your novels. There have always been pioneers (thank goodness) and why should and ordinary, everyday woman who needs an income not be one of them.
    Thank God you’re an intelligent woman and know your research is correct and will be writing two more (at least) for us to enjoy.
    Maybe you caught the reader on a bad day 😉

    Reply
  71. I mostly give accuracy a pass if the characters are really compelling. However, I did write a review where I criticized the author’s inaccuracy for having the hero go to America in 1470.

    Reply
  72. I mostly give accuracy a pass if the characters are really compelling. However, I did write a review where I criticized the author’s inaccuracy for having the hero go to America in 1470.

    Reply
  73. I mostly give accuracy a pass if the characters are really compelling. However, I did write a review where I criticized the author’s inaccuracy for having the hero go to America in 1470.

    Reply
  74. I mostly give accuracy a pass if the characters are really compelling. However, I did write a review where I criticized the author’s inaccuracy for having the hero go to America in 1470.

    Reply
  75. I mostly give accuracy a pass if the characters are really compelling. However, I did write a review where I criticized the author’s inaccuracy for having the hero go to America in 1470.

    Reply
  76. Historical accuracy is very important to me. If an author has messed with the historical time line, I want an author’s note explaining why!
    The only actual wall-banging incident in my long reading career was an author who had a chase through 17th century Edinburgh. The hero turned and fired his pistol at the villain, then fired it again without reloading! I’ve never bought another book by that author.
    Needless to say the Wenches do not offend in this manner, which is why I read you!

    Reply
  77. Historical accuracy is very important to me. If an author has messed with the historical time line, I want an author’s note explaining why!
    The only actual wall-banging incident in my long reading career was an author who had a chase through 17th century Edinburgh. The hero turned and fired his pistol at the villain, then fired it again without reloading! I’ve never bought another book by that author.
    Needless to say the Wenches do not offend in this manner, which is why I read you!

    Reply
  78. Historical accuracy is very important to me. If an author has messed with the historical time line, I want an author’s note explaining why!
    The only actual wall-banging incident in my long reading career was an author who had a chase through 17th century Edinburgh. The hero turned and fired his pistol at the villain, then fired it again without reloading! I’ve never bought another book by that author.
    Needless to say the Wenches do not offend in this manner, which is why I read you!

    Reply
  79. Historical accuracy is very important to me. If an author has messed with the historical time line, I want an author’s note explaining why!
    The only actual wall-banging incident in my long reading career was an author who had a chase through 17th century Edinburgh. The hero turned and fired his pistol at the villain, then fired it again without reloading! I’ve never bought another book by that author.
    Needless to say the Wenches do not offend in this manner, which is why I read you!

    Reply
  80. Historical accuracy is very important to me. If an author has messed with the historical time line, I want an author’s note explaining why!
    The only actual wall-banging incident in my long reading career was an author who had a chase through 17th century Edinburgh. The hero turned and fired his pistol at the villain, then fired it again without reloading! I’ve never bought another book by that author.
    Needless to say the Wenches do not offend in this manner, which is why I read you!

    Reply
  81. I’ve been enjoying Ann Parker’s recent posts on her Silver Rush Mysteries blog, in which Ann has been explaining some of her research into era-appropriate words and phrases.

    Reply
  82. I’ve been enjoying Ann Parker’s recent posts on her Silver Rush Mysteries blog, in which Ann has been explaining some of her research into era-appropriate words and phrases.

    Reply
  83. I’ve been enjoying Ann Parker’s recent posts on her Silver Rush Mysteries blog, in which Ann has been explaining some of her research into era-appropriate words and phrases.

    Reply
  84. I’ve been enjoying Ann Parker’s recent posts on her Silver Rush Mysteries blog, in which Ann has been explaining some of her research into era-appropriate words and phrases.

    Reply
  85. I’ve been enjoying Ann Parker’s recent posts on her Silver Rush Mysteries blog, in which Ann has been explaining some of her research into era-appropriate words and phrases.

    Reply
  86. I enjoy reading a good story. And author notes that explain anachronisms are wonderful and informative. But when you said “phone box” instead of booth my mind went to “police box” and I wondered if The Doctor had come calling in their book….
    lol

    Reply
  87. I enjoy reading a good story. And author notes that explain anachronisms are wonderful and informative. But when you said “phone box” instead of booth my mind went to “police box” and I wondered if The Doctor had come calling in their book….
    lol

    Reply
  88. I enjoy reading a good story. And author notes that explain anachronisms are wonderful and informative. But when you said “phone box” instead of booth my mind went to “police box” and I wondered if The Doctor had come calling in their book….
    lol

    Reply
  89. I enjoy reading a good story. And author notes that explain anachronisms are wonderful and informative. But when you said “phone box” instead of booth my mind went to “police box” and I wondered if The Doctor had come calling in their book….
    lol

    Reply
  90. I enjoy reading a good story. And author notes that explain anachronisms are wonderful and informative. But when you said “phone box” instead of booth my mind went to “police box” and I wondered if The Doctor had come calling in their book….
    lol

    Reply
  91. This is a very interesting discussion and a very complex issue. There are different degrees of historical inaccuracy as the above example of America before 1492 (*horrified shudder*) shows, and also different degrees of expertise of the reader who notices it. Also, different areas of historical accuracy affects readers differently (linguistic mistakes, when they don’t actually involve modern slang or typically modern sentence structure, only a more recent meaning of the word are different from making mistakes with historical characters or events. Social/personal values and attitudes are another complex issue. Regency era in particular is much more complex than the “typical” Regency Romance shows. There were many coexisting attitudes towards any given issue (parental authority, arranged marriage, fortune made in trade, mistresses, fidelity/infidelity in marriage etc.) And there are some “norms” which are overrated among the common Regency Romance reader group. As you say, rules are made to be broken. A Jane Austen example: although she herself alludes to the convention that a lady and a gentleman may only correspond if they are engaged, Fitzwilliam Darcy still writes and gives a letter to Elizabeth after his first proposal and although it stretches the rules, it is done and neither of them thinks about having grievously sinned against the expected mores.

    Reply
  92. This is a very interesting discussion and a very complex issue. There are different degrees of historical inaccuracy as the above example of America before 1492 (*horrified shudder*) shows, and also different degrees of expertise of the reader who notices it. Also, different areas of historical accuracy affects readers differently (linguistic mistakes, when they don’t actually involve modern slang or typically modern sentence structure, only a more recent meaning of the word are different from making mistakes with historical characters or events. Social/personal values and attitudes are another complex issue. Regency era in particular is much more complex than the “typical” Regency Romance shows. There were many coexisting attitudes towards any given issue (parental authority, arranged marriage, fortune made in trade, mistresses, fidelity/infidelity in marriage etc.) And there are some “norms” which are overrated among the common Regency Romance reader group. As you say, rules are made to be broken. A Jane Austen example: although she herself alludes to the convention that a lady and a gentleman may only correspond if they are engaged, Fitzwilliam Darcy still writes and gives a letter to Elizabeth after his first proposal and although it stretches the rules, it is done and neither of them thinks about having grievously sinned against the expected mores.

    Reply
  93. This is a very interesting discussion and a very complex issue. There are different degrees of historical inaccuracy as the above example of America before 1492 (*horrified shudder*) shows, and also different degrees of expertise of the reader who notices it. Also, different areas of historical accuracy affects readers differently (linguistic mistakes, when they don’t actually involve modern slang or typically modern sentence structure, only a more recent meaning of the word are different from making mistakes with historical characters or events. Social/personal values and attitudes are another complex issue. Regency era in particular is much more complex than the “typical” Regency Romance shows. There were many coexisting attitudes towards any given issue (parental authority, arranged marriage, fortune made in trade, mistresses, fidelity/infidelity in marriage etc.) And there are some “norms” which are overrated among the common Regency Romance reader group. As you say, rules are made to be broken. A Jane Austen example: although she herself alludes to the convention that a lady and a gentleman may only correspond if they are engaged, Fitzwilliam Darcy still writes and gives a letter to Elizabeth after his first proposal and although it stretches the rules, it is done and neither of them thinks about having grievously sinned against the expected mores.

    Reply
  94. This is a very interesting discussion and a very complex issue. There are different degrees of historical inaccuracy as the above example of America before 1492 (*horrified shudder*) shows, and also different degrees of expertise of the reader who notices it. Also, different areas of historical accuracy affects readers differently (linguistic mistakes, when they don’t actually involve modern slang or typically modern sentence structure, only a more recent meaning of the word are different from making mistakes with historical characters or events. Social/personal values and attitudes are another complex issue. Regency era in particular is much more complex than the “typical” Regency Romance shows. There were many coexisting attitudes towards any given issue (parental authority, arranged marriage, fortune made in trade, mistresses, fidelity/infidelity in marriage etc.) And there are some “norms” which are overrated among the common Regency Romance reader group. As you say, rules are made to be broken. A Jane Austen example: although she herself alludes to the convention that a lady and a gentleman may only correspond if they are engaged, Fitzwilliam Darcy still writes and gives a letter to Elizabeth after his first proposal and although it stretches the rules, it is done and neither of them thinks about having grievously sinned against the expected mores.

    Reply
  95. This is a very interesting discussion and a very complex issue. There are different degrees of historical inaccuracy as the above example of America before 1492 (*horrified shudder*) shows, and also different degrees of expertise of the reader who notices it. Also, different areas of historical accuracy affects readers differently (linguistic mistakes, when they don’t actually involve modern slang or typically modern sentence structure, only a more recent meaning of the word are different from making mistakes with historical characters or events. Social/personal values and attitudes are another complex issue. Regency era in particular is much more complex than the “typical” Regency Romance shows. There were many coexisting attitudes towards any given issue (parental authority, arranged marriage, fortune made in trade, mistresses, fidelity/infidelity in marriage etc.) And there are some “norms” which are overrated among the common Regency Romance reader group. As you say, rules are made to be broken. A Jane Austen example: although she herself alludes to the convention that a lady and a gentleman may only correspond if they are engaged, Fitzwilliam Darcy still writes and gives a letter to Elizabeth after his first proposal and although it stretches the rules, it is done and neither of them thinks about having grievously sinned against the expected mores.

    Reply
  96. Social rules were broken all the time. However, quite often there were consequences for the rule breaking. I don’t like it when the possibility of consequences is overlooked or ignored. Many of the women who accomplished something were not of the aristocratic class . So much of our concept of the time is really only applicable to the aristocrats and not to what today would be called the middle & lower social-economic class .
    I dislike having the Hardwicke marriage act and the laws of succession ignored. I think the criminal laws and the laws about trials should be followed just as one needs to have the Prince of Wales as Regent and George III as king. While I don’t think one should have the characters wearing pajamas or pulling on zippers, people can be eccentric about clothes.

    Reply
  97. Social rules were broken all the time. However, quite often there were consequences for the rule breaking. I don’t like it when the possibility of consequences is overlooked or ignored. Many of the women who accomplished something were not of the aristocratic class . So much of our concept of the time is really only applicable to the aristocrats and not to what today would be called the middle & lower social-economic class .
    I dislike having the Hardwicke marriage act and the laws of succession ignored. I think the criminal laws and the laws about trials should be followed just as one needs to have the Prince of Wales as Regent and George III as king. While I don’t think one should have the characters wearing pajamas or pulling on zippers, people can be eccentric about clothes.

    Reply
  98. Social rules were broken all the time. However, quite often there were consequences for the rule breaking. I don’t like it when the possibility of consequences is overlooked or ignored. Many of the women who accomplished something were not of the aristocratic class . So much of our concept of the time is really only applicable to the aristocrats and not to what today would be called the middle & lower social-economic class .
    I dislike having the Hardwicke marriage act and the laws of succession ignored. I think the criminal laws and the laws about trials should be followed just as one needs to have the Prince of Wales as Regent and George III as king. While I don’t think one should have the characters wearing pajamas or pulling on zippers, people can be eccentric about clothes.

    Reply
  99. Social rules were broken all the time. However, quite often there were consequences for the rule breaking. I don’t like it when the possibility of consequences is overlooked or ignored. Many of the women who accomplished something were not of the aristocratic class . So much of our concept of the time is really only applicable to the aristocrats and not to what today would be called the middle & lower social-economic class .
    I dislike having the Hardwicke marriage act and the laws of succession ignored. I think the criminal laws and the laws about trials should be followed just as one needs to have the Prince of Wales as Regent and George III as king. While I don’t think one should have the characters wearing pajamas or pulling on zippers, people can be eccentric about clothes.

    Reply
  100. Social rules were broken all the time. However, quite often there were consequences for the rule breaking. I don’t like it when the possibility of consequences is overlooked or ignored. Many of the women who accomplished something were not of the aristocratic class . So much of our concept of the time is really only applicable to the aristocrats and not to what today would be called the middle & lower social-economic class .
    I dislike having the Hardwicke marriage act and the laws of succession ignored. I think the criminal laws and the laws about trials should be followed just as one needs to have the Prince of Wales as Regent and George III as king. While I don’t think one should have the characters wearing pajamas or pulling on zippers, people can be eccentric about clothes.

    Reply

Leave a Comment